Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Documents indicate Woolston used status as tornado mayor to aid master developer

Depositions from the investigation conducted by Osage Beach attorney Thomas Loraine indicate that City Councilman Mike Woolston used his status as a city councilman and as the "tornado mayor" to involve himself in the redevelopment of the city of Joplin's tornado-stricken area.

Of course, Woolston doesn't agree with that assessment and in his deposition said that anyone who thinks that way just doesn't know as much about it as he does.

"I can see an uninformed person who didn't pay a great deal of attention to details might think there was something underhanded going on," Woolston told Loraine, "but if they would look into it, I think I've taken very careful steps to ensure that I didn't cross the line ethically and I've taken what steps I could to ensure that it wasn't perceived as something unethically."

Woolston's steps, which included consulting with Brian Head, who was city attorney at the time, appear more designed to protect himself legally, rather than ethically.

The question has always been would Woolston, despite his knowledge of real estate, have been brought into the efforts to purchase property had it not been for his status as an elected official and one who had come to even greater prominence following the May 22, 2011, Joplin Tornado.

In his deposition, Woolston says he did not know of any connection between Four State Homes, the business for which he was lining up the properties and master dcvelopers Wallace-Bajjali, but that he knew "there was the possibility it may be in partnership with Wallace-Bajjali, but again I didn't know of any formal and written agreement that would take place."

At that point,since Woolston had accepted only one commission on the land sales, Loraine asked , "So essentially, you were working for nothing?"

"On most of these, yes."

"So what did you accomplish by doing that?'

"I felt like it was an opportunity to help rebuild or make some effort towards the rebuilding of a particular part of the city." Woolston then noted that he could see how "an uniformed person" could think there was "something underhanded" going on.

Again, the deposition indicates that Woolston's concern was more with his legal standing than with any ethical problems. "I attempted to keep myself out of hot water," he said. "I don't think for anyone that does their homework, I don't think there's any appearance of impropriety because the first property is one where initially the people had planned to build a converted strip center and there were no discussions of a library-theater complex."

What concerned some citizens who were interviewed by Loraine was the secretive manner in which Woolston conducted his inquiries about their property.

Alisha Brigance told Loraine that Woolston had sent letters to property owners from "18th and Delaware al the way to 20th Street and then down 19th Street to New Jersey."

"It didn't say who was purchasing, who was interested, just that he had someone that was interested in purchasing the property."

When a neighborhood meeting was held with Woolston and Councilman Ben Rosenberg attending, Woolston told property owners he was "not at liberty to say on behalf of his client," who he was representing, according to the Brigance deposition. "So secretive about everything."

Some who were questioned by Loraine accused Woolston of having prior knowledge of the proposed library-theater complex and other Wallace-Bajjali plans before they were ever announced to the public.

In his report, Loraine spelled out the dealings between Woolston, Wallace-Bajjali, and former City Manager Mark Rohr, and while neither Rohr nor Wallace-Bajjali came out looking good, the accusations made against Woolston were the most serious contained in the report and were almost completely ignored by the media, including the Turner Report, because of the controversial firing of Rohr.

From the Loraine Report:

Local residents Dana and William Parker deposed regarding Councilman Woolston's actions during the period just prior to a neighborhood meeting held in October 2012, stating, "Most of the people lived- well, where they lived is where the movie theater is going and all that, the library, and they were concerned because Mike Woolston kept knocking on everybody's door wanting to sell their property, even if they'd already rebuilt, sell it so we can tear it down.

According to the Parkers, Mr. Woolston informed them they were "stupid for rebuilding" and when he was asked by the Parkers why a grocery store was not planned for Sunset Ridge, "he told us at that time that those people were too important; we couldn't do that to them.

The Parkers were further informed by Mr. Woolston that a park which had been deeded to the city "needs to come out."

In short, Councilman Woolston appears to have conducted himself as a one man Redevelopment Corporation and one without a clue as to the statutory requirements of a 353 corporation. The Parkers futher deposed that Councilman Woolston spoke to them about acquiring various lots for a party whose name he at first would not reveal, but eventually told them the party was Four State Homes, which he highly endorsed as follows, "You know they build good stuff."

Thus, according to the Parkers, Mr. Woolston was acting an agent for Mr. Kuehn, who was acting as an agent for Wallace-Bajjali, who was billing the city big fees for finding property to develop. The actions of Mr. Woolston, Mr. Kuehn, and Wallace-Bajjali led the Parkers to conclude conflicts of interest, if not outright fraud, were involved.

The Parkers were not the only residents reporting problems, according to the Loraine Report:

Residents Alisha and Dustin Brigance deposed that Mr. Woolston sent them a letter in July of 2012 stating that someone was interested in purchasing their property. In referring to Mr. Woolston, they stated, "He was working for Four State Homes to purchase an extremely large amount of property in our area.

The Brigances further deposed that there were at the time rumors of a movie theatre/library complex being planned for that area "at 20th and Connecticut." Mr. Woolston deposed that he had received a commission on the sale of 1825 Connecticut.

The Brigances further stated in their deposition that the only person they had contacted regarding the sale of their property was their realtor. However, at a neighborhood meeting they were approached by Gary Box, a representative of Wallace-Bajjali. Mr. Box was shocked when they told him they were not selling because apparently Mr. Woolston had informed him otherwise. The Brigances stated they wound up selling their property because Four State Homes had purchased all the surrounding property.

They also suggested that Mr. Woolston had not been honest with them because he had prior knowledge of the city's plans for the theatre/library eomplex. They went so far to say that Mr. Woolston was "controlling the prices."

Considering the status of the Wallace-Bajjali projects and the ever-shifting promises of grand development to come, Woolston's initial actions look even more suspect.
***
Investigative reporting you will not find anywhere else and news you will not find anywhere else. Please consider taking a  subscription to the Turner Report/Inside Joplin and help this operation continue to grow. Use the button below to subscribe for $1 a week, $3 a month, or $30 a year, or send the money to 2306 E. 8th, Apt. G, Joplin, MO 64801




Payment Options




Support the Turner Report







7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Where is Tuper when you need him. Come on Jon the city is waiting for you to run again...Tuper for council....

Anonymous said...

In the words of Beno Cook!
"What the hell is going on?"

Anonymous said...

The City of Joplin audit should shed some light on this and on Rohr's involvement with Wallace B.
Randy: Please post a link to the report so all can access easily.
thank you.

Anonymous said...

City council is giving a TIF to Woolston's business partner, Kevin Steele on a large amount of property he wants to develop. Curiously, Steele is not at liberty to say who else is involved with him in the "hope" project near 44th and Rangeline. Of course, Woolston assures council that he is not involved in the project and will have no financial benefit from the granting of this huge tax advantage.
But this same council insists we need to vote for their sales tax to pay for the road projects these geniuses think we must have.....

Anonymous said...

The developer for the Hope Valley project is Kevin Steele, who works with Woolston at New Horizons Realty, which Woolston established within the last two years after many years at Pro 100. Woolston is the broker for Steele's license.

Anonymous said...

And ownership of the land within the Hope Valley project is held by the Josephs who were also paid 3 million dollars for their land at 26th and Maiden Lane by Wallace and who also coincedentally have purchased land around the old Coke building. Most of all the strip center buildings going or gone up on Sought Main are also owned by Joseph family members. The Hope Valley TIF is nothing more than increasing the land value of a single property owner many times over at tax payer expense. And I really hope the citizens vote a big no on the renewal of the street and hiway sales tax. If not just to send a signal to the city we are tired of living with these underhanded deals costing us millions, but also to question the need for major hiway construction along the Kansas state line. How on earth would that serve much of anyone. Also vote no on the state ballot to pay for everything with the highest sales tax increase in history. For those, one in particular, who still insist Mr. Woolston is Ozzie and Harriet innocent by virtue of getting re-elected, keep in mind he got re-elected with a 20,000 dollar investment from the State Board of Realtors. 20 grand to land an unpaid position tells me it is has major worth to himself.

Anonymous said...

Note to 8:33- Did you forget about Tuppers purchase of property near Joe Becker Stadium that was so controversial?

I guess it would be the same bad judgment the Joplin voters used re-electing Woolston even though there were obvious conflicts of interest.